Get a load of "Lyra" Evans the chairman of the school trustees in the video from your first link. What the fuck is going on in Ottawa?

I never read the books but have seen discussion that only a few of the movies were close adaptations to the novels anyway.

They want Trump to be the candidate. It's win-win-win-win for Democrats and globalists.

(1) Trump gets convicted and loses the election he goes out one of the biggest clowns ever. Loses 4 straight elections to them. Ends up in jail. It's a wet dream for them.

(2) Trump doesn't get convicted and loses he still goes out one of the biggest losers ever and they retain power. They will pretend this means that the justice system isn't corrupt or that actually it was unfairly biased toward Trump and "rich white men."

(3) Trump gets convicted and wins. What happened last time he was president? They got filthy rich in his economy. They'll let him fix that a bit. Their media numbers will go back through the roof selling TDS. They use his unpopularity, compulsiveness, and inarticulation against him as usual to significantly increase their power in ways they never dreamed they could do so openly. They get to cover his criminal trials and call him a convicted criminal and grandstand against him. These prosecutions come with political and legal consequences that mean he never gets to do anything substantive. It's a wet dream for them.

(4) Trump doesn't get convicted and wins. He's still in basically the same position as (3) except they non-stop rail about how this proves that things are actually biased in favor of people like Trump.

And, America First is over. He salted the earth with DeSantis because that's the only way he can act. He's totally captive to his narcissism. The demographics for elections another 8 years down the road are a disaster. This was the window to make a change and we get media circus Trump to make sure it goes nowhere.

To fundraise, you fucking moron. Just like Trump did. I'm so sick of how stupid people let themselves get over Trump. It's no different cognitively than people with TDS except worse to experience because these were supposed to be the "sane" people amidst clown world.

This is going to be really interesting because the pre-sale numbers are supposedly utterly massive for this movie. It's a near certainty that it will have a huge opening. But, the question is how many of the people who are going to see it think they are getting an adultish feminist diatribe instead of a fun family movie about a beloved toy character. Hopefully this will result in terrible word of mouth and a massive decline after the opening.

I suspect your understanding of what I do is as robust as your understanding of GAAP.

So your thoughts are limited to corporation = bad even though you can't actually explain why this is bad. It's not even a choice for Disney. This is the law. ABC has to treat Disney at arms-length by charging them for commercial time the way they would (and at an equivalent value) charge any other company wanting to run commercials on their network. That's disadvantageous for Disney in many ways. It certainly makes their practices more transparent.

No offense, but you don't have any idea what you're talking about. It's an expense for the entity that produces the movie and potentially taxable revenue for ABC. I wonder what you think should happen when ABC gives commercial time to a Disney movie that it would have otherwise sold to some other company (and how that would be any more clarifying than the existing regime)?

It's not a shell game to avoid taxes (I'm a corporate attorney). It's a necessary, legally required business/accounting practice for entities with common ownership. Indeed, as opposed to being obfuscating, it actually provides a significant amount of clarity that benefits Disney, investors, regulators, and tax collectors.

In some cases, yes. The second article references $10M that Disney essentially paid to itself (ABC) for promotion during the Oscars alone.

You get a 'D' for reading comprehension.

Your first link:

With a $250 million production cost and a reported $140 million marketing cost, The Little Mermaid, under the most generous of projections, needs to gross approximately $560 million at the worldwide box office, according to Hollywood insiders, to reach its break-even threshold.

However, this $560 million figure, which assumes a $300 million domestic gross and a $260 million international gross, also includes $100 million in expected earnings from television, both free and pay television, another $100 million from home entertainment, digital and DVD, and $80 million from international television sales and streaming rights. Basically, the $560 million break-even scenario accounts for an exhaustion of the film’s potential revenue streams beyond its theatrical life and leaves little possibility for the film to be able to achieve any substantial profit for Disney.

So, this article which cites another article for that entire analysis, is saying that if it makes $560M at the box office that it can break-even if it has massive post-box office success. That includes the money Disney+ will pay Disney on the books for the streaming rights (meaning that Disney owns the risk if this movie doesn't drive subscribers to their service in a way that justifies that price).

Your second link contains practically no information:

Not counting the costs for marketing, which are likely in the millions, Disney would need to make at least $500 million on this film for it to be considered a “success.” Some outlets have indicated it would need closer to $750 million, given the marketing budget!

So, according to this article, $500M only covers the production costs not the $140M marketing costs that the first article cites. It's also using a standard of "success" as opposed to break-even. So, it's probably not a literal loss of a hundred million dollars as OP states but it's only flirting with breaking even which makes it a failure.

"Lila Lavender" set off my tranny detector and if you check his Tabroom page it confirms it (I know, a layup when combined with all the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist shit). There is a bunch of even crazier stuff in there than what made the article.

I am a transgender woman who has a deeper voice, please take that into account. It's exhausting to see judges and debaters who are unable to resolve this contradiction, either attribute my RFD to men on the panel, or treat me like a man as a result of my voice.

https://archive.is/gQ7nw

That's cute from a textbook perspective but if it's going to be Biden/Kamala or Trump/Noem, the possibility that Noem ends up president is pretty far down my list of considerations.

I don't know how reliable this reporting is. I'm usually the one shitting on Trump but he has a problem with women voters and so a woman VP makes sense as a matter of electoral politics. That said, MTG is a pure no-go. People absolutely hate her. Noem is the most serious choice and it's not like she would have a serious policy role. It would be interesting to see if Lake and Trump ended up feuding because they are both aggressive attention whores (though I actually like Kari Lake) and Trump can't help but shit on the people he works with.

Thanks. I saw Ritchie's prior movie (Operation Fortune) and it wasn't unwatchable but it had a lot of "everyone is kinda gay and that's cool," not to mention Aubry Plaza.

What Republican pandered harder, and frankly, did more for Jews than Trump? The ADL was still going after Trump. They exist primarily as a leftist-elite organization that will occasionally police their own side if it veers into issues related to Jews.

You're right that this is just a massive virtue signal/pandering to Florida Jews. However, you're wrong about the last part. Jews aren't as strongly Democrat as people think -- it's about 70/30, which is about as well as Republicans do with any "minority" group outside of Latinos. But, Florida Jews are particularly gettable votes for Republicans. Trump got 41% of Jews in Florida in 2020. And, Jews, left and right, love to be pandered to on the hate speech front.

https://archive.is/68bPN

Alternatively, Crowder went well out of his way to smear the Daily Wire. Even releasing private conversations. He convinced a lot of people that Daily Wire are "Big Con," and controlled opposition. Now, it's coming out not just from this video, not just from the divorce, but from other former employees (check out what Dave Landau has to say on Michael Malice's show) on his show that Crowder is actually a controlling asshole just as miserly and overbearing as he would claim of the Daily Wire.

Candace Owens is a grifter who likes to get into these personal vendettas so that's obviously her angle. That doesn't make the whole story false. Nor does it have to be "I accept that Steven Crowder is a controlling asshole who had an unreasonable reaction to Daily Wire's offer sheet amidst an emotionally tumultuous period of his life therefore I reject Crowder completely."

And they were removing some security/anti-tracking features?

I've been using Brave the last several years as well. Although, I'm recalling some news about Chromium itself getting pozzed by Google meaning that Brave would also be affected? I can't recall the details.

To be fair, the tendency to reduce motivations to single-factor analysis is the problem. It probably is a constellation of reasons.

Kind of like Trump. I'd go to his Truth Social to link his message but it blocks VPN access because... freedom?

EDIT: Text from elsewhere:

"DeSanctus is being absolutely destroyed by Disney. His original P.R. plan fizzled, so now he’s going back with a new one in order to save face. Disney’s next move will be the announcement that no more money will be invested in Florida because of the Governor - In fact, they could even announce a slow withdrawal or sale of certain properties, or the whole thing," Trump wrote. "Watch! That would be a killer. In the meantime, this is all so unnecessary, a political STUNT! Ron should work on the squatter MESS."

I assume some ESG money will flow their way and even some bribes behind the scenes to facilitate the transition.

BlackRock increased it's ownership of Fox Corp to 15.1% at the beginning of February.

Still, it's pretty great. It has her picture, a phonetic spelling of her name, it takes pains to make sure Biden doesn't confuse himself as to whom the question is directed even as he reads it.

I am pretty sure this is just coming from culinary/gastronomy jargon. Even 15+ years ago on all the cooking shows like Top Chef/Hell's Kitchen they would always talk about picking your "protein." This was also a period where it was a fad to combine science/technology and cooking (hence gastronomy) and part of that was making cooking more technical/jargon-y.